|
dave chilvers Registered: Jan 12, 2002 Total Posts: 1263 Country: United Kingdom |
|
|
Valorin Registered: Jul 07, 2005 Total Posts: 363 Country: Canada |
To my knowledge, very few Nikon lenses except for the very exotic have any problems adapting to Canon. That lens is no problem, spoken from firsthand experience. It's a very good lens, I just don't like the focal length. |
|
weezintrumpete Registered: May 18, 2005 Total Posts: 1366 Country: United States |
GREAT lens. I've used it on my Rebel XT and 5D without problems. Here's some shots: ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Any softness in these is due to my mis-focusing Anyway, fantastic lens, don't hesitate! |
|
ulrikft Registered: Apr 17, 2008 Total Posts: 2316 Country: Norway |
105 2.5 AI-S is a great, great lens! |
|
dave chilvers Registered: Jan 12, 2002 Total Posts: 1263 Country: United Kingdom |
Thanks you guys. Seems like a bargain then(provided it`s OK) |
|
mawz Registered: Sep 11, 2005 Total Posts: 2782 Country: Canada |
dave chilvers wrote: |
|
brucemuir Registered: Dec 24, 2008 Total Posts: 1420 Country: United States |
I have an older Ai-d Nikkor P-Auto 105 f/2.5 than clears on my 5D. |
|
dave chilvers Registered: Jan 12, 2002 Total Posts: 1263 Country: United Kingdom |
That will be good if it`s a stop |
|
Makten Registered: Jul 14, 2008 Total Posts: 915 Country: Sweden |
mawz wrote: |
|
mawz Registered: Sep 11, 2005 Total Posts: 2782 Country: Canada |
brucemuir wrote: |
|
wayne seltzer Registered: Dec 22, 2007 Total Posts: 838 Country: United States |
There is also the faster 105 1.8 AI-S version too. |
|
mawz Registered: Sep 11, 2005 Total Posts: 2782 Country: Canada |
wayne seltzer wrote: |
|
dave chilvers Registered: Jan 12, 2002 Total Posts: 1263 Country: United Kingdom |
I had a brief affair with a D200 a couple of years back and one of the lenses I purchased new was the 105 2.8 micro VR and what a cracker of a lens that was. The Canon 100 2.8 macro could be as good maybe if they added IS. |
|
mawz Registered: Sep 11, 2005 Total Posts: 2782 Country: Canada |
dave chilvers wrote: |
|
dave chilvers Registered: Jan 12, 2002 Total Posts: 1263 Country: United Kingdom |
mawz wrote: |
|
gasrocks Registered: May 23, 2005 Total Posts: 1274 Country: United States |
I tell my students that you probably cannot beat the Nikon PC (or AI-S) 105/2.5 as a classic portrait lens. At least bang for buck wise. I have a P.C. and also the 105/2 DC which is a whole 'nother story. |
|
mawz Registered: Sep 11, 2005 Total Posts: 2782 Country: Canada |
dave chilvers wrote: |
|
dave chilvers Registered: Jan 12, 2002 Total Posts: 1263 Country: United Kingdom |
mawz wrote: |
|
Marcel VanEerd Registered: Mar 02, 2007 Total Posts: 1357 Country: Canada |
I have three (!!!) Nikkor-PC 105 f2.5's. Bought two more after my first one was such a gem. I use them without problem on 1.6 and 1.3 crop bodies. |
|
mawz Registered: Sep 11, 2005 Total Posts: 2782 Country: Canada |
dave chilvers wrote: |
|
m-a-x Registered: Apr 27, 2009 Total Posts: 97 Country: Germany |
How's that one compared to the Contax Zeiss T* Planar 100mm f/2.0? |
|
TWoK Registered: Sep 17, 2008 Total Posts: 2443 Country: Japan |
mawz wrote: |
|
loudtiger Registered: Jun 07, 2004 Total Posts: 1432 Country: United States |
how does the 2.5 compare to the f/2 AF-D for portraiture? |
|
TWoK Registered: Sep 17, 2008 Total Posts: 2443 Country: Japan |
The 2.5 is a great lens, its small, has very nice bokeh and is quite sharp. I prefer the EF 100/2 USM or 105/1.8 AIS over it though. On a 5D really the 100/2 is a much better choice. The 105/2DC is nice, just amazingly sharp, but it doesn't focus as far before infinity as either the 105/2.5 or 105/1.8 do. |